Opinion
January 12, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.).
Ordered that the amended judgment and the judgment are affirmed.
The court's determination that the defendant had violated his probation was supported by a "`preponderance of the evidence * * * which requires a residuum of competent legal evidence in the record'" ( People v. Rennie, 190 A.D.2d 830, quoting People v. Machia, 96 A.D.2d 1113, 1114).
The defendant's contention that the court improperly resentenced him on the violation of probation because it lacked an updated presentence report is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Loper, 215 A.D.2d 406).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
Mangano, P.J., Copertino, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.